D
Deleted member 107043
Where do you suggest they should have built it? And if the mandate was to get a Marvel attraction to the resort ASAP what they did with TOT was the fastest and most efficient way to do it.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Where do you suggest they should have built it? And if the mandate was to get a Marvel attraction to the resort ASAP what they did with TOT was the fastest and most efficient way to do it.
October82
Well-Known Member
When I used the word cheap earlier, I was explicit about meaning something like the first definition. Others in this thread have meant something more like 2 and 3. Although one's view of the quality is debatable - you seem to be in the camp that approves - any discussion with respect to the first definition ultimately isn't debatable.
October82
Well-Known Member
Typically people post on discussion forums because they want to hear different opinions from their own. I'm glad that you like this change, but I'm guessing you won't like this forum if people disagreeing with you bothers you.
vancee
Well-Known Member
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
What does overall change have to do with people's opinions with this project? And why are you worried about those of us who aren't fond of this? Do you, enjoy what you're interested in and leave us be.
If you want nothing but positivity, I suggest you try DisBoards.
dweezil78
Well-Known Member
Test Track -- a much longer and more extensive ride -- was only closed 8 months and re-emerged with a completely new queue and on-ride experience... using the same track layout of course. With the Tower's much simpler on-ride experience of literally 2 scenes, I think a lot can be done in 5 months plus whatever pre-production was done off-site I obviously don't know anything for certain, but I would bet people will be surprised by how different the majority of the queue/ride experience (minus the boiler room) this will be when it opens in May -- assuming it does open on time.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Anywhere in the backlot would of been fine and it sounds like part of Marvel Land is going there anyway.
I suspect if most people had a vote they would of chosen keeping TOT , a purpose built GOTG ride and the Captain America Coaster over a GOTG overlay, Captain America Coaster and Ironman ride. TOT could have stayed. GOTG could have been the simulator (not taking up too space as the rumored Iron Man probably won't) and Captain America would have been the shiny new toy. But unfortunately that's not as fast as an overlay.
Thats the whole issue with this project...a mandate that's focused on the short term to compensate for leadership that sat on the Marvel IP for 8 years and counting. As a fan and not a shareholder, "fast" and "efficient" aren't words that get me excited.
dweezil78
Well-Known Member
I'm referring to the giant t-shaped slab of concrete that houses the attraction. If you seriously see a ton that registers 'pueblo-deco' other than the pieces that are still being worked on, then I guess that's cool you can still tie it back to old Hollywood? I don't really know what else to say.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Repeat after me, the Iron Man experience is not coming to DCA (or the corpse of DHS).
It's the rumour I've been fighting to stymy for three odd years now. Not to under-cut your points, but it's one of my triggers!
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Repeat after me, the Iron Man experience is not coming to DCA (or the corpse of DHS).
Lol. I sure hope not. It doesn't look that great. Why are you so sure though? I believe a few folks with inside knowledge have said it's a possibility.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
There has actually never been a credible insider who has mentioned it! Besides whatever you want to count Jim Hill as.
It's the STI of fan forum rumours. It's been propagated from one forum user to the next so often that people think it's real, including Jim.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I haven't heard the greatest things about Jim Hill but I don't know how he gained that reputation. I thought I remember our very own @GiveMeTheMusic mention that Iron man was being discussed for DCA?
Last edited:
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
Jim says a lot of stuff and doesn't have the best sources every time. As a result, his track record on inside info isn't great.
I am not aware of any plans to bring Stark Tours to DLR. As @BrianLo said above, HKDL attractions are typically locked into a 5 year global exclusive contract. The film would also have to be completely rewritten and remade to place the attraction elsewhere.
nevol
Well-Known Member
While we have all blamed this project on Chapek's incompetence, P+R does measure guest satisfaction/popularity of all of their attractions in guest surveys. Isn't the more interesting mystery here that Tower was actually ranking so low that it warranted replacement? Maybe it really was the second most popular attraction in the park, after RSR, but what could have also become the case is that WOC, Midway Mania, and Soarin' all topped it. For what we think of as the second-best attraction in the park to be ranking that low in their metrics, if that was the case, must have told a different story than we all tell ourselves. Of course, they could also just be lazy and incompetent, replacing soarin over CALIFORNIA with around the World (a lateral move that broke from the park's theme integrity and was ALSO/if not moreso beloved by californians) and then TOT with another non-california project. Or they are gearing up fora name change but given the amount of press we have already seen about the namechange for DHS and the announcement of investment/changes for EPCOT ahead of announcement, if that was really disney's intent, it would have found its way into the press by now. Isn't it fun to be a critic/fan?
D.Silentu
Well-Known Member
From an IGN interview with Joe Rhode:
Asked whether other characters were considered for the ride before the Guardians, Rohde replied, “Very early in any conceptual exploration, you float these ideas. There’s a lot of Marvel characters you can imagine. You’re like, ‘Oh, Spider-Man!’ But there’s a super compressed little space. And you’re like, ‘What is he doing in this tiny little space?!’ Usually what happens is you hit on something and a bunch of little dominoes go clack, clack, clack and then, ‘That’s going to work!
It sounds like the ride was assigned to imagineers well before a new theme was settled upon. I don't have a hard time believing that the powers that be felt Tower was an easy choice to change out. Consider from their view: the nature of the ride system would narrow the possibilities for alteration(read: reasonable budget), the perceived draw of the ride was the thrill so the theme could be fluid, and it was close to potential expansion space for future marvel attractions. I'm more inclined to think the ride is popular, but that made it all the more attractive as a candidate for change. It's a low risk proposition.
(By the way, being new to these parts I'm not totally sure that I did right quoting another site like that. If it's uncouth let me know)
Asked whether other characters were considered for the ride before the Guardians, Rohde replied, “Very early in any conceptual exploration, you float these ideas. There’s a lot of Marvel characters you can imagine. You’re like, ‘Oh, Spider-Man!’ But there’s a super compressed little space. And you’re like, ‘What is he doing in this tiny little space?!’ Usually what happens is you hit on something and a bunch of little dominoes go clack, clack, clack and then, ‘That’s going to work!
It sounds like the ride was assigned to imagineers well before a new theme was settled upon. I don't have a hard time believing that the powers that be felt Tower was an easy choice to change out. Consider from their view: the nature of the ride system would narrow the possibilities for alteration(read: reasonable budget), the perceived draw of the ride was the thrill so the theme could be fluid, and it was close to potential expansion space for future marvel attractions. I'm more inclined to think the ride is popular, but that made it all the more attractive as a candidate for change. It's a low risk proposition.
(By the way, being new to these parts I'm not totally sure that I did right quoting another site like that. If it's uncouth let me know)
Travel Junkie
Well-Known Member
Looks cheap to me, but I guess I'm absurd for having that view.
I do believe the ride itself will be a better experience than before, but the outside looks dreadful.
I do believe the ride itself will be a better experience than before, but the outside looks dreadful.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
You do realize that if it does happen at this point you're going to have to leave the Disney fan community with your head hanging in shame?Repeat after me, the Iron Man experience is not coming to DCA (or the corpse of DHS).
It's the rumour I've been fighting to stymy for three odd years now. Not to under-cut your points, but it's one of my triggers!
NobodyElse
Well-Known Member
NobodyElse
Well-Known Member
I think it's totally fine, and even appropriate. If you're going to say "I read somewhere that a guy said this" or even make a direct quote, it's best to source it. I'd even go a step further and create a link directly to it if possible, so that people could see that you didn't take something out of context, etc. (I believe there are a few sites that you can't link to, but that would become apparent at the time.)
Thanks for contributing.
